Coreutils POSIX changes not documented in release notes
Paul W. Frields
stickster at gmail.com
Thu Mar 9 14:15:54 UTC 2006
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 08:25 -0500, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 06:42:17PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > >You can disagree all you want, but this is a change from FC4 to FC5:
> > >
> > >fc4% sort +2 < /var/log/messages | head -1
> > >Mar 7 00:27:35 ti63 smartd[2187]: Device: /dev/sda, Temperature changed
> > >-2 Celsius to 35 Celsius since last report
> > >
> > >rawhide% sort +2 < /var/log/messages | head -1
> > >sort: open failed: +2: No such file or directory
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > This seems unrelated to the man page entry you quoted. Can you find more
> > information on this and provide us the content?
>
> I don't mean to be an ass, but do you read before you mouth off? Judging by
> the fedora-* list traffic, no. Let's try again:
No need to be rude, Rahul wasn't. He was matter of factly stating a
request, not questioning your intelligence.
> 1003.1-2001. For example, if you have a newer system but are running
> software that assumes an older version of POSIX and uses `sort +1' or
> `tail +10', you can work around any compatibility problems by setting
> `_POSIX2_VERSION=199209' in your environment.
>
> Sorry, I'm cranky. Now I have to go put a wrapper around coreutils and
> log old-style arguments.
>
> Environment variable tests are completely broken. That was already known
> in the 1970's ... but I gave up on POSIX when I was a reviewer for the
> pthreads drafts ...
The change in this behavior in GNU sort(1) was noted when the POSIX
standard changed back in 2001 or so. I believe there was a lot of talk
around that time about the new behavior. It was known at that time that
scripts using the [soon to be] deprecated "sort +N" behavior would
[eventually] need to change under GNU coreutils. Looks like they
finally broke the compatibility to make the change complete, at least in
GNU sort(1). Certainly we can note *that* in the release notes, and if
you're able to track down other specific breakages between FC4 and FC5,
those would be good candidates for relnotes as well. Thanks for your
efforts.
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20060309/dc1fd2ba/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-docs-list
mailing list